Workplace & Labour
You Were Only on a Contract — It Just Expired
A worker kept on rolling annual fixed-term contracts for years is told the contract simply 'expired' and a new contractor will bring its own people — as if the years created no rights
Premium
intermediate
8 minutes
The Situation
What They Said
“You were only on a contract — it expired, so there is nothing you can do. And the new contractor is bringing its own people.”
This is said to a worker — often a low earner like a cleaner — who has been kept on yearly fixed-term contracts for many years doing the same ongoing work, then told the contract has simply 'expired', with a new service provider taking over. It treats the label 'fixed-term contract' as if it erases years of continuous service and the rights that come with it.
The Fallacy
Form Over Substance
The argument relies on the label of the contract ('fixed-term', 'expired') instead of the reality of the working relationship. South African labour law looks at substance, not form: where an employer renews a fixed-term contract again and again for work that is really permanent, the law can treat the worker as having a reasonable expectation of renewal — and, for a low earner, as a permanent employee. Calling it a mere 'expiry' hides a decision that the law may treat as a dismissal.
What the Law Says
Your Legal Foundation
Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
Section 186(1)(b) — Non-Renewal as Dismissal
“'Dismissal' means that ... an employee employed in terms of a fixed term contract of employment reasonably expected the employer to renew a fixed term contract of employment on the same or similar terms but the employer offered to renew it on less favourable terms, or did not renew it; or to retain the employee in employment on an indefinite basis but otherwise on the same or similar terms as the fixed term contract, but the employer ... did not offer to retain the employee.”
After years of yearly renewals for the same ongoing work, a worker usually has a reasonable expectation that the contract will be renewed — or that they will be kept on permanently. When the employer then refuses to renew, the law treats it as a dismissal, not a neutral 'expiry'. That dismissal must be fair, and it can be referred to the CCMA (or the relevant bargaining council) within 30 days of the last day of work.
Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
Section 198B(3) and (5) — Deemed Permanent Employment
“An employer may employ an employee on a fixed term contract for longer than three months only if the nature of the work for which the employee is employed is of a limited or definite duration, or the employer can demonstrate any other justifiable reason for fixing the term of the contract. Employment in terms of a fixed term contract concluded or renewed in contravention of this is deemed to be of indefinite duration.”
If the worker earns below the Basic Conditions of Employment Act threshold and has been kept on fixed-term contracts for more than three months without a genuine temporary reason, the contract is deemed to be of indefinite duration — in effect, permanent employment. Ongoing cleaning of a building is not work of 'limited or definite duration' — so ten years of renewals points to permanence, not a series of genuine short-term jobs. (This protection does not apply to employers with fewer than 10 employees, or fewer than 50 in a business under two years old.)
Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
Section 197 — Transfer of a Business as a Going Concern
“If a transfer of a business takes place ... the new employer is automatically substituted in the place of the old employer in respect of all contracts of employment in existence immediately before the date of transfer; all the rights and obligations between the old employer and each employee ... continue in force as if they had been rights and obligations between the new employer and each employee.”
When a business or service is transferred 'as a going concern', existing staff transfer automatically to the new employer on the same terms — they cannot simply be replaced. BUT this is not automatic just because a new contractor takes over: whether a change of service provider is a 'transfer as a going concern' depends on the facts (what is actually taken over) and is often disputed. So this is a claim the worker can raise — not a guarantee to rely on.
What Scripture Says
God's Word on This
Deuteronomy 24:14-15 (NET)
“You must not oppress a lowly and poor servant, whether one of your Israelite brothers or one of the resident foreigners who are living in your land and villages. You must pay his wage that very day before the sun sets, for he is poor and his life depends on it.”
Scripture singles out the low-paid, dependent worker for special protection — precisely the person most easily treated as disposable. A cleaner kept on for years and then discarded on a technicality is the very 'lowly and poor servant' the law of God tells those in power not to oppress.
James 5:4 (NET)
“Look, the pay you have held back from the workers who mowed your fields cries out against you, and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.”
God hears the cry of workers who are cheated of what they are owed. Withholding from someone the security and dignity their years of labour have earned is not a neutral business decision in Scripture's eyes — it is an injustice that is seen and answered.
🔒
You Know the Law — But Do You Know What to Say?
Reading your rights is one thing. Using them under pressure — calmly, correctly, in the right words — is what actually protects you. Members get the scripted rebuttal for this exact situation: what to say first, what to say if they push back, the tone to use, and the constitutional provision to cite. Practise out loud with audio until it's automatic.
Unlock This Scenario — R89/month
Identity & Dignity and Gender & Equality are free · All 17 domains from R89/month · Cancel anytime
Not ready to subscribe? Get the free checklist first.
10 real rights scenarios — what to say, what to cite, what to refuse. Free, no card needed.
What They'll Say Next
Common Counter-Arguments
After you respond, they may push back with these arguments. Members get the full rebuttal for each.
They might say: “The contract clearly stated an end date, so you agreed it would end — there is no dismissal.”
🔒 Subscribe to see the full rebuttal and legal counter-argument.
They might say: “A completely new contractor is taking over — they are a different employer and owe you nothing.”
🔒 Subscribe to see the full rebuttal and legal counter-argument.
Know Your Rights. Know Your Word.
198 South African law and Scripture scenarios — exact rebuttals, constitutional law, and Scripture. Practise out loud with audio. Free to start.
Try Free — Identity & Dignity
No credit card · Upgrade anytime for all 17 domains